HOBBY LOBBY, SCOTUS, & WHAT IT REALLY MEANS I learned early on that FB is not the place to carry on politician/hot topic discussions. So I very rarely weigh in on such issues. For me the exception has been the Hobby Lobby case this week. So much of the reporting has been incomplete & misleading. This is common for news media outlets & organizations (both sides mind you) because most are driven more by an agenda than by the pursuit of accuracy & progress. Below is what I have written about this case. For me this article is not a political statement but one of just ensuring that the discussion is accurate. If accuracy becomes a victim to an agenda then real progress cant be made. Many outlets fail to report the issue completely. Hobby Lobby actually offers 16 out of 20 forms of contraceptions in their health insurance for employees. The four they do not (basis for this lawsuit) are what are considered post conception contraceptions. Hobby Lobby’s health care plan includes access, copay-free, to the following categories of FDA-approved birth-control: - Male condoms - Female condoms - Diaphragms with spermicide - Sponges with spermicide - Cervical caps with spermicide - Spermicide alone - Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin - Birth-control pills with progestin alone - Birth control pills (extended/continuous use) - Contraceptive patches - Contraceptive rings - Progestin injections - Implantable rods - Vasectomies - Female sterilization surgeries - Female sterilization implants Hobby Lobby offers 75% of all forms of contraceptions. So while Hobby Lobby may make a decision based on their morals beliefs on post conception contraceptions the portrayal of them in many outlets has been incomplete. Contrary to many media outlets reporting, the ruling by SCOTUS was not about all corporations. The decision was narrowly written for closely held/private companies. So while it applies to corporations like Hobby Lobby it does not apply to corporations like Ford Motor Company, Bank of America, or BP. This ruling changed nothing for publicly traded corporations (which make up the majority of US based corporations). But even if it did, does that mean the employers of over half of all Americans will suddenly nix contraception coverage? No, for several reasons: First, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation poll, 85 percent of large employers had already offered contraception coverage before Obamacare mandated it. Second, federal law makes clear that companies seeking religious exemptions from such mandates must demonstrate sincere religious beliefs. So its not like they can just suddenly decide their religion precludes them from the Obamacare mandate. And lastly, the vast majority of small businesses (96 percent, according to Kaiser) dont have to abide by the contraception mandate because they have fewer than 50 full-time employees. As for freedoms of the individuals vs the freedom of a closely held corporation there’s a fine line here. Technically this decision did not take away anyone’s “rights.” This ruling actually protected rights. If someone has a legitimate moral objection to an issue should they be forced to pay for it? A small business, a Private Agency, or a closely held/private corporation has built their business in part on their belief system. Whether its an individual or a family working as a corporation, that is not publicly traded and beholden to share holders, they each have rights like an individual. It is also important to note that this decision doesn’t preclude Hobby Lobby employees from purchasing these four forms of contraceptives themselves. If their belief system allows for the use of such contraceptives they can purchase Plan B with their money. That’s the same right the owners of Hobby Lobby are exercising in saying they don’t want their money being used for that purpose. And of course Hobby Lobby employees have the right to leave. That’s the beauty of our country: If Hobby Lobby is doing something everyone believes is wrong (exploitive child labor for example) they will fail. Hobby Lobby I believe asked for the middle ground in the benefits they offer vs the 4 they requested relief from due to their beliefs/morality. A point I take exception with is the thought that “Limiting even one form of contraception interferes with a patients right to make the appropriate medical choice. Again there is a fine line of rights here as not even the first amendment is an absolute right. There are clear boundaries. As with every right the rights of everyone has to be balanced for the greater good. Hobby Lobby unlike many corporations offer ‘copay free’ contraceptives to their employees, with the exception of four post conception contraceptives. That’s commendable because much of the political discourse today is “all or nothing.” When these polarizing statements & actions are made the ability to accomplish the greater good is greatly diminished. Our country is evenly divided on almost every topic, this one included. If common ground is to be found then there has to be balance. All or nothing has to be set aside. People often say you can’t legislate morality. The truth of the matter is all legislation is based on someone’s morality. The debate is whose. With the divide in our country, if progress is to be made then accuracy, honesty, & openness to middle ground has to be apart of the dialogue. Sources: - The 96 page ruling by SCOTUS - Kaiser Family Foundation - Politico - Hobby Lobby Note: Be civil with any response please
Posted on: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 11:18:09 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015